Old Expert Infantry Standards or new? How to prepare better Infantryman?

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 May 2015 23:11:35 -0400

I earned my EIB in 1989. It was an individual skill, timed test of 29 Infantry skill level 1 and 2 tasks completed over a 4 day period. The new test involves an individual tactical scenario in which Soldiers perform tasks while moving through the scenario. I have not seen the new test in action and was wondering which test you think is better and why?

Response by COL Charles Williams made May 29 at 2015 12:17 AM

COL Charles Williams — Fri, 29 May 2015 00:17:40 -0400

Not my lane, but this is what Fort Benning says as of 1 Apr 15. Different, but you are better suited to decide which was was harder. I know, us old guys often lament how standards drop, which is generally just not true... Different yes, but easier open to opinion.

http://www.benning.army.mil/infantry/eib/content/pdf/usais350-6.pdf

a. APFT. The APFT tests the physical endurance and conditioning of the Candidates, and is
the first graded event they will undertake. The APFT is conducted to standard in accordance
with FM 7-22. Candidates must meet height and weight requirements as outlined in AR
600-9. The APFT is not re-testable nor can it be waived. Refer to Chapter 4 for more
details on this event.

b. Land Navigation. Land Navigation tests the ability of the Candidates to navigate from
one point to another using a map and compass while equipped with their individual combat
gear. This is the second graded event they will undertake, demonstrating their proficiency
under both day and night conditions. Land Navigation testing will be conducted in
accordance with FM 3-25.26 and is not re-testable. Unit level waivers are considered on a
case by case basis. Refer to Chapter 5 for more details on this event.

c. Master Skills Testing. Master Skills Testing stations evaluates individual proficiency and
confidence with weapon systems common to an Infantry Company, as well as their associated
functions. MST is conducted to a defined standard in a formal, round-robin fashion. MST
is re-testable and Candidates must pass each MST station in order to continue to the ITT
lanes. Refer to Chapter 6 for more details on this event.

d. Individual Tactical Test Lanes. ITT Lanes evaluate a Candidate’s ability to demonstrate
their tactical and technical proficiency of individual Infantry tasks to standard. Lanes are
scenario driven, incorporating stressors and conditions that force Candidates to constantly
adapt to changing situations as they attempt to achieve a successful overall outcome of a
simulated Infantry mission. This phase of testing differs from a controlled round-robin
evaluation, as Candidates tactically complete a series of individual tasks to acceptable
standards while the environmental conditions are changed. ITT lanes are not re-testable.

f. Forced March. The forced march and completion of the weapons proficiency test are
the last events in the EIB test. Candidates must complete a 12-mile route in three hours or
less, and then successfully complete the tasks associated with the weapons proficiency test
to receive a Go for the 12-Mile forced march. Both events will be conducted according to
standards established in this publication, with additional standards for the 12-Mile forced
march outlined in FM 21-18. The 12-Mile forced march and the weapons proficiency test
are not re-testable. Refer to Chapter 8 for more details on this event.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 29 at 2015 10:38 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 29 May 2015 10:38:08 -0400

If I'm understanding this post correctly, it seems your test has changed to what I've always known EFMB to be like (since 2009). Many different tasks are tested, and are performed while walking through a scenario that presents these tasks in as logic an order as possible (EFMBers will laugh. I meant as logical as possible, not realistic).

Sound about right?

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 30 at 2015 8:15 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 30 May 2015 08:15:22 -0400

I just earned my EIB at the beginning of this month. The current events are ordered as follows:
Day 1 - PT test (75% in each event), day land nav and night land nav (times are set by an evaluator from Benning based on the course length, etc)
Lane rotations occur on days 2-4. There are 3 lanes each with 10 tasks each (Urban, TCP, Patrol).
Day 2 - 3 individual timed tasks (assembly/disassembly/operation of weapon systems), 1 timed mission that contains 7 individual tasks (generally 2-3 tasks on each lane are medical)
Day 3 - same as day 2
Day 4 - same as day 2 and 3
Day 5 - 12 mile ruck march in 3 hours with 35 lbs + water. After the ruck is completed there is the additional task of clear/disassemble M4 in 2 minutes and then reassemble/function check in 2 minutes. This task counts as part of the ruck march and if failed, constitutes a failure of the ruck march and an automatic failure from testing.

Numbers - We started out with 185 people. After day 1 we were down to 95 or so. At the end of day 4, only 28 remained. We lost another 2 on day 5... 1 failed to meet the ruck time, and 1 failed the M4 tasks. Overall, we graduated 26 of 186, and I was lucky enough to be one of the 4 that graduated "true blue."

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 30 at 2015 11:11 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 30 May 2015 23:11:27 -0400

Also, rumor has it that there has been enough of an outcry that Benning is going to be reverting back to the old testing procedure of 30 individually timed tasks that must be completed in sequence. It is also being tossed around that they are going to up the rucks timed standard... but also up the ruck weight requirement to 60-80 lbs. May just be unsubstantiated hearsay though...

Response by 1SG Jason Smith made Jun 2 at 2015 5:48 PM

1SG Jason Smith — Tue, 02 Jun 2015 17:48:19 -0400

I earned my EIB under the old system of testing. I did watch and participate in the new standards in other units I served with. I do not think one is easier than the other. The standards are the same for almost every task including the candidate killer...hand grenades

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 15 at 2015 10:36 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 15 Jun 2015 22:36:02 -0400

When I earned my EIB in 2013, the No-Go process was quite different. We were allowed to have 2.5 No-Gos PER LANE, so a total of 7.5. The half No-Go was for a decision task, of which there were 2 per lane. So long as you did not get 3 or more No-Gos on a lane you were good to go. In my honest opinion that was far to easy. I received 5.5 No-Gos (of which I should have protested 3, but it did not matter). This was also when they began switching to the more outcome based test, where as long as the task was completed, baring safety violations, you were good to go. Some cadre still enforced the strict, by the book, answers (hence my 3 protests). I believe that this was far to easy to pass, and not completely the direction EIB should go.
However the way it is this year, 3 total No-Gos and you are done, or fail a MST task two times, or bust time on the mission portion, is much to hard. I believe that keeping the lane No-Gos separate from the MST is more ideal. Three total No-Gos on the lane = you are done. Same with the time limit, which is based of the cadre validation process and should be easy to complete. The MST No-Go two times on the same task should also apply, but those should not apply to the lane count. To balance that out, if you receive a No-Go at each MST task, so three on that lane, then you are also out. I believe that this is a more balanced grading scheme, and will help decrease the abysmal failure rate, which currently only 5% of candidates pass (I am not positive on this percentage, I just know that it in the single digits). I am not advocating making it easier, but it certainly needs to at least be attainable.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Jun 15 at 2015 10:55 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Mon, 15 Jun 2015 22:55:59 -0400

I'm old school too. I didn't know they made changes like that. I figured the toys just changed. Back then, the big killer was requesting permission to enter the net. Good luck even explaining that these days.

Response by SFC John Trujillo made Jun 18 at 2015 7:59 PM

SFC John Trujillo — Thu, 18 Jun 2015 19:59:12 -0400

The type of test is not the problem. This came to be know as the Everyone In Battalion Badge once those in leadership positions figured out how to take credit for the individual soldier's accomplishment. When I got mine we had a weight requirement for the 12 miler. A few years later when I went back to visit my buddies, the standard had been changed to a "packing list". I would have used a G.I. Joe Uniform for that. A funny thing about this award, it can also be tested out by 18 Series but when I was at B/3/7 SFG(A), the CSM would not allow 18Ds to compete because we are also eligible for the Expert Field Medical badge. The only thing wrong with his plan was the only personnel with EIBs in our company were 18D that had been 11Cs before going SF. We were to be tasked with training up the other MOSs, except for the couple of new 18Cs. SFC Lenny Taylor told the CSM that he would not selectively train the troops. Either the Deltas were included or we would boycott the training. After being ordered to train all the other 18 Series, this SFC told the CSM that he would fail everyone who came to his station. The CSM's head almost exploded "You can't do that", to which Taylor responded, "How do you know what the standards are, you don't have one" pointing to the CSM's girly chest. In case you feel as if this is insubordination, as 11Cs we were always the "detail" platoon for the 11Bs and this was happening again as 18Ds. When will the army stop punishing the highest GT scores?

Response by PFC Howard Bryant Blackshear made Jul 18 at 2018 2:06 PM

PFC Howard Bryant Blackshear — Wed, 18 Jul 2018 14:06:05 -0400

It took me 90 Days to earn my CIB!!!!!in the Jungles of Vietnam!!!!!!